Research hotspots and trends of spinal cord stimulation for neuropathic pain: a bibliometric analysis from 2004 to 2023.

The purpose of this study is to systematically analyze the development trend, research hotspots, and future development direction on the treatment of neuropathic pain (NP) with spinal cord stimulation through bibliometric method. We extracted the literature related to the treatment of NP with spinal cord stimulation from January 2004 to December 2023 from the Web of Science database. As a result, a total of 264 articles were retrieved. By analyzing the annual published articles, authors, countries, institutions, journals, co-cited literature, and keywords, we found that the count of publication in this field has been experiencing an overall growth, and the publications within the past 5 years accounted for 42% of the total output. Experts from the United States and the UK have made significant contributions in this field and established a stable collaborative team, initially establishing an international cooperation network. Pain is the frequently cited journal in this field. The study on spinal cord stimulation therapy for NP especially the study on spinal cord stimulation therapy for back surgery failure syndrome (FBSS) and its potential mechanisms are the research hotspots in this field, while the study on novel paradigms such as high-frequency spinal cord stimulation and spinal cord burst stimulation represents the future development directions. In short, spinal cord stimulation has been an effective treatment method for NP. The novel paradigms of spinal cord stimulation are the key point of future research in this field.

Spinal Cord Stimulator Inequities Within the US Military Health System.

OBJECTIVES: Although studies have described inequities in spinal cord stimulation (SCS) receipt, there is a lack of information to inform system-level changes to support health care equity. This study evaluated whether Black patients exhaust more treatment options than do White patients, before receiving SCS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included claims data of Black and non-Latinx White patients who were active-duty service members or military retirees who received a persistent spinal pain syndrome (PSPS) diagnosis associated with back surgery within the US Military Health System, January 2017 to January 2020 (N = 8753). A generalized linear model examined predictors of SCS receipt within two years of diagnosis, including the interaction between race and number of pain-treatment types received. RESULTS: In the generalized linear model, Black patients (10.3% [8.7%, 12.0%]) were less likely to receive SCS than were White patients (13.6% [12.7%, 14.6%]) The interaction term was significant; White patients who received zero to three different types of treatments were more likely to receive SCS than were Black patients who received zero to three treatments, whereas Black and White patients who received >three treatments had similar likelihoods of receiving a SCS. CONCLUSIONS: In a health care system with intended universal access, White patients diagnosed with PSPS tried fewer treatment types before receiving SCS, whereas the number of treatment types tried was not significantly related to SCS receipt in Black patients. Overall, Black patients received SCS less often than did White patients. Findings indicate the need for structured referral pathways, provider evaluation on equity metrics, and top-down support.

Case report: Spinal cord stimulation for pain relief in two patients with locally recurrent pelvic malignancy.

Introduction: Chronic cancer-related pain from locally recurrent infiltrative cancers within the bony confines of the pelvis is a devastating and hard to manage condition that can be refractory to many conventional pain management methods. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an evolving and safe method of pain management and can be trialled in a quick and well-tolerated operation under local anaesthesia. To date, this has not been reported in the setting of locally recurrent inoperable pelvic cancers. Case description: In the present study, we report two cases of patients with severe back and lower limb pain resulting from recurrent anal and rectal cancers involving the right lumbar and sacral nerve roots as well as the bony sacrum, which severely affected quality of life and daily functioning. Discussion: Following successful SCS, effective pain relief was observed. Conclusion: SCS could represent an effective supplementary or alternative technique to conventional pain management in this challenging group of patients, especially if other available methods have been exhausted.

Durability of Evoked Compound Action Potential (ECAP)-Controlled, Closed-Loop Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) in a Real-World European Chronic Pain Population.

INTRODUCTION: Closed-loop spinal cord stimulation (CL-SCS) is a recently introduced system that records evoked compound action potentials (ECAPs) from the spinal cord elicited by each stimulation pulse and uses this information to automatically adjust the stimulation strength in real time, known as ECAP-controlled SCS. This innovative system compensates for fluctuations in the distance between the epidural leads and the spinal cord by maintaining the neural response (ECAP) at a predetermined target level. This data collection study was designed to assess the performance of the first CL-SCS system in a real-world setting under normal conditions of use in multiple European centers. The study analyzes and presents clinical outcomes and electrophysiological and device data and compares these findings with those reported in earlier pre-market studies of the same system. METHODS: This prospective, multicenter, observational study was conducted in 13 European centers and aimed to gather electrophysiological and device data. The study focused on the real-world application of this system in treating chronic pain affecting the trunk and/or limbs, adhering to standard conditions of use. In addition to collecting and analyzing basic demographic information, the study presents data from the inaugural patient cohort permanently implanted at multiple European centers. RESULTS: A significant decrease in pain intensity was observed for overall back or leg pain scores (verbal numerical rating score [VNRS]) between baseline (mean ± standard error of the mean [SEM]; n = 135; 8.2 ± 0.1), 3 months (n = 93; 2.3 ± 0.2), 6 months (n = 82; 2.5 ± 0.3), and 12 months (n = 76; 2.5 ± 0.3). Comparison of overall pain relief (%) to the AVALON and EVOKE studies showed no significant differences at 3 and 12 months between the real-world data release (RWE; 71.3%; 69.6%) and the AVALON (71.2%; 73.6%) and EVOKE (78.1%; 76.7%) studies. Further investigation was undertaken to objectively characterize the physiological parameters of SCS therapy in this cohort using the metrics of percent time above ECAP threshold (%), dose ratio, and dose accuracy (µV), according to previously described methods. Results showed that a median of 90% (40.7-99.2) of stimuli were above the ECAP threshold, with a dose ratio of 1.3 (1.1-1.4) and dose accuracy of 4.4 µV (0.0-7.1), based on data from 236, 230, and 254 patients, respectively. Thus, across all three metrics, the majority of patients had objective therapy metrics corresponding to the highest levels of pain relief in previously reported studies (usage over threshold > 80%, dose ratio > 1.2, and error < 10 µV). CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, this study provides valuable insights into the real-world application of the ECAP-controlled CL-SCS system, highlighting its potential for maintaining effective pain relief and objective neurophysiological therapy metrics at levels seen in randomized control trials, and potential for quantifying patient burden associated with SCS system use via patient-device interaction metrics. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: In the Netherlands, the study is duly registered on the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (Trial NL7889). In Germany, the study is duly registered as NCT05272137 and in the United Kingdom as ISCRTN27710516 and has been reviewed by the ethics committee in both countries.

Non-invasive Transcutaneous Spinal Cord Stimulation Programming Recommendations for the Treatment of Upper Extremity Impairment in Tetraplegia.

OBJECTIVES: This study analyzes the stimulation parameters implemented during two successful trials that used non-invasive transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation (tSCS) to effectively improve upper extremity function after chronic spinal cord injury (SCI). It proposes a framework to guide stimulation programming decisions for the successful translation of these techniques into the clinic. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Programming data from 60 participants who completed the Up-LIFT trial and from 17 participants who subsequently completed the LIFT Home trial were analyzed. All observations of stimulation amplitudes, frequencies, waveforms, and electrode configurations were examined. The incidence of adverse events and relatedness to stimulation parameters is reported. A comparison of parameter usage across the American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale (AIS) subgroups was conducted to evaluate stimulation strategies across participants with varying degrees of sensorimotor preservation. RESULTS: Active (cathodal) electrodes were typically placed between the C3/C4 and C6/C7 spinous processes. Most sessions featured return (anodal) electrodes positioned bilaterally over the anterior superior iliac spine, although clavicular placement was frequently used by 12 participants. Stimulation was delivered with a 10-kHz carrier frequency and typically a 30-Hz burst frequency. Biphasic waveforms were used in 83% of sessions. Average stimulation amplitudes were higher for biphasic waveforms. The AIS B subgroup required significantly higher amplitudes than did the AIS C and D subgroups. Device-related adverse events were infrequent, and not correlated with specific waveforms or amplitudes. Within the home setting, participants maintained their current amplitudes within 1% of the preset values. The suggested stimulation programming framework dictates the following hierarchical order of parameter adjustments: current amplitude, waveform type, active/return electrode positioning, and burst frequency, guided by clinical observations as required. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis summarizes effective stimulation parameters from the trials and provides a decision-making framework for clinical implementation of tSCS for upper extremity functional restoration after SCI. The parameters are aligned with existing literature and proved safe and well tolerated by participants.

Biportal Endoscopic Spinal Cord Stimulation Paddle Lead Implantation: Technical Note and Preliminary Clinical Results.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to elucidate a novel, minimally invasive surgical technique using a biportal endoscope for the implantation of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) paddle leads and to report the preliminary results of its clinical application. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The perioperative data of patients who underwent the biportal endoscopic SCS paddle lead implantation in our department were collected; the surgical procedure was delineated, and the clinical outcomes were assessed. RESULTS: From February 2022 to December 2023, six patients underwent biportal endoscopic SCS paddle lead implantation. The median follow-up time was nine months (range one to three months). The median intraoperative blood loss was 30 mL (range 25-50 mL), and the median operative time was 87.5 minutes (range 75-110 minutes). One patient experienced severe neck pain during the operation, whereas the other five patients experienced no surgical complications. One patient was found to have a slight lead migration three months after surgery, which did not affect the therapeutic effect. The median visual analogue scale (VAS) of the surgical area was 0.5 (range 0-2), 2.5 (range 1-4), and 0.5 (range 0-1) during the operation and one day and one week after the operation, respectively. The median VAS of the six patients' primary disease was 8 (range 7-9) before surgery and 2.5 (range 1-4) at the last postoperative follow-up (pain reduction ≥50%). CONCLUSION: Paddle lead systems for SCS can be implanted successfully using a biportal endoscopic technique.

Electrical Stimulation and Motor Function Rehabilitation in Spinal Cord Injury: A Systematic Review.

Spinal cord injury (SCI) often leads to devastating motor impairments, significantly affecting the quality of life of affected individuals. Over the last decades, spinal cord electrical stimulation seems to have encouraging effects on the motor recovery of impacted patients. This review aimed to identify clinical trials focused on motor function recovery through the application of epidural electrical stimulation, transcutaneous electrical stimulation, and functional electrical stimulation. Several clinical trials met these criteria, focusing on the impact of the aforementioned interventions on walking, standing, swimming, trunk stability, and upper extremity functionality, particularly grasp. After a thorough PubMed online database research, 37 clinical trials were included in this review, with a total of 192 patients. Many of them appeared to have an improvement in function, either clinically assessed or recorded through electromyography. This review outlines the various ways electrical stimulation techniques can aid in the motor recovery of SCI patients. It stresses the ongoing need for medical research to refine these techniques and ultimately enhance rehabilitation results in clinical settings.

External Oblique Intercostal Plane Block: A Case Report and Review of Literature.

Chronic low back pain (CLBP) and post-laminectomy syndrome (PLS) can pose significant therapeutic challenges, often refractory to conservative management. We present a case of a 52-year-old male with refractory CLBP and PLS who underwent spinal cord stimulation (SCS) lead placement, and subsequently developed chronic right anterior chest wall and upper abdominal pain. Despite using SCS and opioid therapy, the pain persisted until an ultrasound-guided external oblique intercostal plane block (EOIPB) was administered, resulting in complete pain relief. This case highlights the efficacy of EOIPB in managing chronic post-surgical neuropathic pain, underscoring its potential as a valuable intervention in such cases.

Combining neuromodulation strategies in spinal cord injury gait rehabilitation: A proof of concept, randomized, crossover trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate if acute intermittent hypoxia (AIH) coupled with transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation (tSCS) enhance task-specific training and lead to superior and more sustained gait improvements as compared to each of these strategies used in isolation in persons with chronic, incomplete spinal cord injury (SCI). DESIGN: Proof of concept, randomized crossover trial SETTING: Outpatient, rehabilitation hospital INTERVENTIONS: Ten participants completed 3 intervention arms: 1) AIH, tSCS, and gait training (AIH + tSCS), 2) tSCS plus gait training (SHAM AIH + tSCS), and 3) gait training alone (SHAM + SHAM). Each arm consisted of 5 consecutive days of intervention with a minimum of a 4-week washout between arms. The order of arms was randomized. The study took place from December 3, 2020 to January 4, 2023. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: 10-meter walk test (10MWT) at self-selected velocity (SSV) and fast velocity (FV), 6-minute walk test (6MWT), Timed Up and Go (TUG) SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Isometric ankle plantarflexion and dorsiflexion torque RESULTS: TUG improvements were 3.44 seconds (95% CI: 1.24-5.65) significantly greater in the AIH + tSCS arm than the SHAM AIH + tSCS arm at post-intervention (POST) and 3.31 seconds (95% CI: 1.03-5.58) greater than the SHAM + SHAM arm at 1-week follow up. SSV was 0.08 m/s (95% CI: 0.02-0.14) significantly greater following the AIH + tSCS arm than the SHAM AIH + tSCS at POST. Although not significant, the AIH + tSCS arm also demonstrated the greatest average improvements compared to the other two arms at POST and 1WK for the 6MWT, FV, and ankle plantarflexion torque. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study is the first to demonstrate that combining these three neuromodulation strategies leads to superior improvements in the TUG and SSV for individuals with chronic incomplete SCI and warrants further investigation.

Insights into the pathophysiology and response of persistent spinal pain syndrome type 2 to spinal cord stimulation: a human genome-wide association study.

BACKGROUND: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) provides pain relief for some patients with persistent spinal pain syndrome type 2 (PSPS 2), but the precise mechanisms of action and prognostic factors for a favorable pain response remain obscure. This in vivo human genome-wide association study provides some pathophysiological clues. METHODS: We performed a high-density oligonucleotide microarray analysis of serum obtained from both PSPS 2 cases and pain-free controls who had undergone lower back spinal surgery at the study site. Using multivariate discriminant analysis, we tried to identify different expressions between mRNA transcripts from PSPS 2 patients relative to controls, SCS responders to non-responders, or SCS responders to themselves before starting SCS. Gene ontology enrichment analysis was used to identify the biological processes that best discriminate between the groups of clinical interest. RESULTS: Thirty PSPS 2 patients, of whom 23 responded to SCS, were evaluated together with 15 pain-free controls. We identified 11 significantly downregulated genes in serum of PSPS 2 patients compared with pain-free controls and two significantly downregulated genes once the SCS response became apparent. All were suggestive of enhanced inflammation, tissue repair mechanisms and proliferative responses among the former. We could not identify any gene differentiating patients who responded to SCS from those who did not respond. CONCLUSIONS: This study points out various biological processes that may underlie PSPS 2 pain and SCS therapeutic effects, including the modulation of neuroimmune response, inflammation and restorative processes.

Diabetic Neuropathy: A Guide to Pain Management.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Diabetic neuropathy is a common complication of diabetes mellitus (DM) and can affect up to 50% of DM patients during their lifetime. Patients typically present with numbness, tingling, pain, and loss of sensation in the extremities. Since there is no treatment targeting the underlying mechanism of neuropathy, strategies focus on preventative care and pain management. RECENT FINDINGS: Up to 69% of patients with diabetic neuropathy receive pharmacological treatment for neuropathic pain. The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) confirmed four drugs for painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN): pregabalin, duloxetine, tapentadol, and the 8% capsaicin patch. Nonpharmacological treatments such as spinal cord stimulation (SCS) and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) both show promise in reducing pain in DM patients. Despite the high burden associated with PDN, effective management remains challenging. This update covers the background and management of diabetic neuropathy, including its epidemiology, pathogenesis, preventative care, and current therapeutic strategies.

Differential Target Multiplexed Spinal Cord Stimulation: A UK Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this economic analysis was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of differential target multiplexed spinal cord stimulation (DTM-SCS) for treating chronic intractable low back pain, compared with conventional spinal cord stimulation (C-SCS) and conservative medical management (CMM), by updating and expanding the inputs for a previously published cross-industry model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This model comprised a 12-month decision-tree phase followed by a long-term Markov model. Costs and outcomes were calculated from a UK National Health Service perspective, over a base-case horizon of 15 years and up to a maximum of 40 years. All model inputs were derived from published literature or other deidentified sources and updated to reflect recent clinical trials and costs. Deterministic and one-way sensitivity analyses were performed to calculate costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) across the 15-year time horizon and to explore the impact of individual parameter variability on the cost-effectiveness results. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was undertaken to explore the impact of joint parameter uncertainty on the results. RESULTS: DTM-SCS was the most cost-effective option from a payer perspective. Compared with CMM alone, DTM-SCS was associated with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £6101 per QALY gained (incremental net benefit [INB] = £21,281). The INB for C-SCS compared with CMM was lower than for DTM-SCS, at £8551. For the comparison of DTM-SCS and C-SCS, an ICER of £897 per QALY gained was calculated, with a 99.5% probability of cost-effectiveness at a £20,000 per QALY threshold. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with low back pain treated over a 15-year follow-up period, DTM-SCS and C-SCS are cost-effective compared with CMM, from both payer and societal perspectives. DTM-SCS is associated with a lower ICER than that of C-SCS. Wider uptake of DTM-SCS in the UK health care system is warranted to manage chronic low back pain.

Identifying SCS Trial Responders Immediately After Postoperative Programming with ECAP Dose-Controlled Closed-Loop Therapy.

INTRODUCTION: Drawbacks of fixed-output spinal cord stimulation (SCS) screening trials may lead to compromised trial outcomes and poor predictability of long-term success. Evoked compound action potential (ECAP) dose-controlled closed-loop (CL) SCS allows objective confirmation of therapeutic neural activation and pulse-to-pulse stimulation adjustment. We report on the immediate patient-reported and neurophysiologic treatment response post-physiologic CL-SCS and feasibility of early SCS trial responder prediction. METHODS: Patient-reported pain relief, functional improvement, and willingness to proceed to permanent implant were compared between the day of the trial procedure (Day 0) and end of trial (EOT) for 132 participants in the ECAP Study undergoing a trial stimulation period. ECAP-based neurophysiologic measurements from Day 0 and EOT were compared between responder groups. RESULTS: A high positive predictive value (PPV) was achieved with 98.4% (60/61) of patients successful on the Day 0 evaluation also responding at EOT. The false-positive rate (FPR) was 5.6% (1/18). ECAP-based neurophysiologic measures were not different between patients who passed all Day 0 success criteria ("Day 0 successes") and those who did not ("needed longer to evaluate the therapy"). However, at EOT, responders had higher therapeutic usage and dose levels compared to non-responders. CONCLUSIONS: The high PPV and low FPR of the Day 0 evaluation provide confidence in predicting trial outcomes as early as the day of the procedure. Day 0 trials may be beneficial for reducing patient burden and complication rates associated with extended trials. ECAP dose-controlled CL-SCS therapy may provide objective data and rapid-onset pain relief to improve prognostic ability of SCS trials in predicting outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The ECAP Study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04319887).

Does Spinal Cord Stimulation Improve Sleep Disturbances Independently of Pain Relief in Patients With Chronic Pain? An Explorative, Observational Study.

OBJECTIVES: Chronic pain poses a significant health challenge worldwide and is associated with both disability and reduced quality of life. Sleep disturbances are reported in 67% to 88% of patients with chronic pain. Pain and sleep affect each other reciprocally; we aimed to study this bidirectional relationship in patients treated with spinal cord stimulation (SCS) for chronic pain. Specifically, we investigated whether sleep improves after treatment with SCS and whether this improvement may be mediated by pain reduction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An observational cohort study was conducted in patients with chronic neuropathic pain treated with SCS at a single neurosurgical department in Denmark. Outcomes were assessed preoperatively and at three, six, and 12 months postoperatively, and thereafter annually. Primary outcomes were pain intensity (numeric rating scale) and insomnia at first follow-up (Insomnia Severity Index). The association between sleep and pain was investigated using linear regression and mediation analysis. RESULTS: Forty-three patients were included in the study. The mean insomnia score was reduced by 25% from 18.1 (SD 6.0) to 13.5 (SD 6.6) (p = 0.0001). Pain intensity was reduced 38% from 7.4 (SD 1.6) to 4.6 (SD 2.1) at the first follow-up (p ≤ 0.0001). Changes in pain and changes in insomnia scores were significantly but weakly associated (regression coefficient = 1.3, 95% CI [0.3; 2.2], p = 0.008, r2 = 15.7%); and changes in pain score were not found to mediate changes in sleep score (ß = -0.02, 95% CI [-0.15; 0.11], p = 0.76). CONCLUSIONS: We found that patients treated with SCS showed significant improvements in both insomnia and pain intensity at first follow-up. Improvements in insomnia and pain intensity were significantly but weakly associated, and improvements in pain intensity score did not mediate improvements in insomnia score. Thus, improvements in self-reported insomnia in patients treated with SCS for chronic pain may predominantly be caused by other factors than reduced pain intensity.

A Visual and Narrative Timeline Review of Spinal Cord Stimulation Technology and US Food and Drug Administration Milestones.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to present key technologic and regulatory milestones in spinal cord stimulation (SCS) for managing chronic pain on a narrative timeline with visual representation, relying on original sources to the extent possible. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified technical advances in SCS that facilitated and enhanced treatment on the basis of scientific publications and approvals from the United States (US) Food and Drug Administration (FDA). We presented milestones limited to first use in key indications and in the context of new technology validation. We focused primarily on pain management, but other indications (eg, motor disorder in multiple sclerosis) were included when they affected technology development. RESULTS: We developed a comprehensive visual and narrative timeline of SCS technology and US FDA milestones. Since its conception in the 1960s, the science and technology of SCS neuromodulation have continuously evolved. Advances span lead design (from paddle-type to percutaneous, and increased electrode contacts) and stimulator technology (from wireless power to internally powered and rechargeable, with miniaturized components, and programmable multichannel devices), with expanding stimulation program flexibility (such as burst and kilohertz stimulation frequencies), as well as usage features (such as remote programming and magnetic resonance imaging conditional compatibility). CONCLUSIONS: This timeline represents the evolution of SCS technology alongside expanding FDA-approved indications for use.

Neuromodulation for postherpetic neuralgia: Preliminary experience in a single center.

BACKGROUND: Postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) after herpes zoster is a debilitating complication that severely affects the quality of life of patients. Neuromodulation such as spinal cord stimulation (SCS) and trigeminal semilunar ganglion stimulation (TSGS) have become effective methods for treating postherpetic neuralgia. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of clinical data from 30 patients with postherpetic neuralgia who underwent SCS or TSGS treatment from January 2022 to January 2024. Patients received conventional treatment before neuromodulation. Clinical data including patient age, gender, pain characteristics, treatment outcomes were collected. The efficacy was evaluated using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and the Modified Global Impression of Change scale. Optimal stimulation parameters were also analyzed. RESULTS: The results showed that postoperative pain was significantly reduced in both SCS and TSGS groups, with a higher satisfaction rate in the SCS group (89 % vs. 77 %). The optimal stimulation parameters for the two treatments were also different. Compared to SCS, TSGS required a higher frequency but lower pulse width and voltage. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that neuromodulation may be an effective treatment for PHN, but the subtle differences between SCS and TSGS support a more personalized treatment approach.

The Neurostimulation Appropriateness Consensus Committee (NACC)®: Recommendations for the Mitigation of Complications of Neurostimulation.

INTRODUCTION: The International Neuromodulation Society convened a multispecialty group of physicians based on expertise and international representation to establish evidence-based guidance on the mitigation of neuromodulation complications. This Neurostimulation Appropriateness Consensus Committee (NACC)® project intends to update evidence-based guidance and offer expert opinion that will improve efficacy and safety. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Authors were chosen on the basis of their clinical expertise, familiarity with the peer-reviewed literature, research productivity, and contributions to the neuromodulation literature. Section leaders supervised literature searches of MEDLINE, BioMed Central, Current Contents Connect, Embase, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and PubMed from 2017 (when NACC last published guidelines) to October 2023. Identified studies were graded using the United States Preventive Services Task Force criteria for evidence and certainty of net benefit. Recommendations are based on the strength of evidence or consensus when evidence was scant. RESULTS: The NACC examined the published literature and established evidence- and consensus-based recommendations to guide best practices. Additional guidance will occur as new evidence is developed in future iterations of this process. CONCLUSIONS: The NACC recommends best practices regarding the mitigation of complications associated with neurostimulation to improve safety and efficacy. The evidence- and consensus-based recommendations should be used as a guide to assist decision-making when clinically appropriate.

Transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation on motor function in patients with spinal cord injury: A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is effective in the rehabilitation of patients with spinal cord injury (SCI). However, the evidence is mainly based on case reports. OBJECTIVE: To summarize the influence of transcutaneous SCS on extremity motor function of patients with SCI in a meta-analysis. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in electronic databases including PubMed, Cochrane library, Embase, Web of Science, Wanfang, and CNKI to obtain relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). A random-effects model was used to pool the results by incorporating the impact of the potential heterogeneity. The most recent database search was conducted on December 31, 2023. RESULTS: Six small-scale open-label or single-blind RCTs were included. Transcutaneous SCS on the basis of conventional rehabilitation could significantly improve limb strength (mean difference: 4.82, p = 0.004; I2 = 0%) and attenuate spasticity (MD: -0.40, p = 0.02; I2 = 0%). The upper-extremity motor function was not significantly affected (p = 0.75). However, transcutaneous SCS significantly improved mobility as indicated by walking speed (MD: 0.13 m/s, p = 0.009; I2 = 0%) and walking distance (standardized MD: 0.62, I2 = 0%). CONCLUSION: Transcutaneous SCS is effective in improving limb strength, spasticity and mobility of patients with SCI.

A Pragmatic Review on Spinal Cord Stimulation Therapy for Parkinson's Disease Gait Related Disorders: Gaps and Controversies.

BACKGROUND: Parkinson's Disease (PD) is a progressive neurological disorder that results in potentially debilitating mobility deficits. Recently, spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been proposed as a novel therapy for PD gait disorders. The highest levels of evidence remain limited for SCS. OBJECTIVES: In this systematic review and narrative synthesis, the literature was searched using combinations of key phrases indicating spinal cord stimulation and PD. METHODS: We included pre-clinical studies and all published clinical trials, case reports, conference abstracts as well as protocols for ongoing clinical trials. Additionally, we included trials of SCS applied to atypical parkinsonism. RESULTS: A total of 45 human studies and trials met the inclusion criteria. Based on the narrative synthesis, a number of knowledge gaps and future avenues of potential research were identified. This review demonstrated that evidence for SCS is currently not sufficient to recommend it as an evidence-based therapy for PD related gait disorders. There remain challenges and significant barriers to widespread implementation, including issues regarding patient selection, effective outcome selection, stimulation location and mode, and in programming parameter optimization. Results of early randomized controlled trials are currently pending. SCS is prone to placebo, lessebo and nocebo as well as blinding effects which may impact interpretation of outcomes, particularly when studies are underpowered. CONCLUSION: Therapies such as SCS may build on current evidence and be shown to improve specific gait features in PD. Early negative trials should be interpreted with caution, as more evidence will be required to develop effective methodologies in order to drive clinical outcomes.